Quote:
Originally posted by Flames Draft Watcher+May 19 2005, 01:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flames Draft Watcher @ May 19 2005, 01:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by hulkrogan@May 19 2005, 06:51 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon
|
Quote:
@May 19 2005, 12:23 PM
Makes perfect sense.
What if the person in front has no brake-lights?# They brake hard, person behind doesn't see any lights, and they run right into them.# Good example that the person hitting someone else from behind isn't _always_ at fault.
If you're driving w/ no brake-lights, and someone rear ends you, you might be screwed.
|
If your brake lights are in working order, ask almost any cop and they will tell you if you say "I saw a cat that I thought was going to run into the road" and that is enough to make the tailgater at fault 100%.
|
I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make. So far no one has mentioned cats as the reason they slowed down. We're debating about deliberately slowing down to cause an accident. [/b][/quote]
The point is, if someone is being a dickhead, you hit your brakes and they run into you a cop comes to investigate. He says "Why did you hit your brakes for no apparent reason?"
You say: "I thought I saw a cat about to run infront of my car so I slowed down" and that is good enough to put fault on the guy tailgating.